Slogan two wrongs don't make a right

The slogan "Two wrongs don't make a right" refers to the widespread belief that the an evil act cannot be canceled out by a second evil act, and is especially applied in the context of punishment or retaliation.

Schoolchildren, for example, are taught not to respond to an insult with another insult. If it is wrong to insult one's classmate, then an attempt to make one's taunter "know how it feels" by returning the insult is also wrong.

Opponents of using execution as a penalty for serious crimes such as murder, rape, treason, etc. typically use this slogan in their arguments. Taking as a premise that to end a human life on purpose is always a "wrong," they assert that execution for murder (one wrong) would constitute a second wrong, and "two wrongs don't make a right" so execution is just as improper as returning a schoolyard taunt.

Supporters of using execution as a penalty for serious crime argue variously that ending a human life is not always a "wrong," or that it is in some cases a "lesser wrong." Nearly all localities in the United States, for example, regard self-defense as a valid concern in a "him or me" case. That is, faced with the prospect of (a) allowing oneself to be murdered or (b) killing one's assailant, these localities regard killing the assailant as (variously) perfectly valid or the "lesser of two evils".

When it is less clear that "kill or be killed" are the only choices, there are sometimes arguments (both moral and legal) that a person in fear of his life should try to run away, or to placate the assailant as by acceding to demands for money, and so on. These arguments, in turn, have counterarguments why "kill or be killed" is still a valid choice.

Laws of localities and countries vary considerably in their interpretation and applicability of these principles.

See: capital punishment, self-defense, Two wrongs make a right (logical fallacy)